Mr. Right:If the proponents of medical marijuana (one of which I happen to be) are serious about using it for pain management, they will welcome this study, as smoking anything presents a risk to the lungs and other respiratory organs that tablets will avoid.

However, if governments and drug companies are serious about pain relief and not just controlling marijuana, they will acknowledge that some users, suffering from nausea, for example, will find a pill unacceptable and still need to smoke it.

We'll know the true motives of both sides by how this debate shapes up as research progresses.

Suggesting we don't already know the true motive of both sides is, at this point in the debate, high comedy.

nekom:That's very true, but on the flip side if one or more cannabinoids in particular can be found to treat certain conditions, they could be isolated and cater to various things. For example, the chemicals that help glaucoma may not be the same ones that aid in appetite stimulant.

I fully support the characterization of this and any other promising natural compounds.

I am more concerned with the comments I saw that suggest that many people are unfamiliar with exactly how common alternative forms of ingestion are, and how the whole question of the potential harmful effects by smoking can be avoided entirely for many patients.

It is my fear that people will be encouraged to believe that any associated risks (real or imagined) of smoking pot, will be used to keep people ignorant of the other possibilities, and act to suppress research into the specific active compounds. Or that pharma will use this to suppress natural preparations while they work on a "safe" one. I think these alternative methods of ingestion should continue to be available, regardless of whether pharma is sincere in pursuing this. If they come up with anything, it might be a good time for a double-blind experiment for comparison.

fireclown:Psycoholic_Slag: fireclown: No, subby. This story isn't "big pharma gets richer", it is "medical marijuana advocates don't want medicine so much as they want to get high".

You say that like it's a bad thing. Thanks for looking out for my best interests.

I don't mean to. I favor full legalization for recreational use. But I have come to despise the artifice. Every time someone starts going on and on about the amazing medical powers (and total lack of negative effects) of Marijuana, they seem to be stoners. I just want some more honesty in the conversation.

I hear you. I'm just as tired of hearing the opposite argument that weed is so dangerous that only a pharmaceutical company should be allowed to exploit and profit from it.

Smoking is fundamentally unhealthy and oral consumption is better for you.

Duh.

There's a few problems, though: Some people using medical marijuana can't hold down pills. They may prefer the immediate relief of smoking or vaporization, the easier self-titration, or even the shorter-lasting effects.

Medical marijuana patients may find that a given strain or combination of strains gives them an improved quality of life that can't be improved upon by a specific Big Pharma ingestable, even a crude drug 1:1 equivalent of the pot pills available in wide variety from their local dispensary.

...And let me get all hippy-dippy for a moment. I think everyone agrees that, at long last, the tide is turning for pot. As marijuana becomes more accepted and legal for both medicinal and recreational purposes, there will likely be corporations spending big lobbying money to control how Americans consume, procure, grow, and breed cannabis, with the goal of reducing the number of options that aren't theirs. Anybody concerned with the degree of power that the Real Money wields should probably be vigilant about Big Pharma, Big Tobacco, and Big Ag hi-jacking marijuana liberalization.

nekom:That's interesting. I am aware of vaporizers but it never occurred to me that the temperature can be tuned in. But even still, you aren't getting absolutely pure compounds, you're getting whatever mix gets taken in at a specific heat.

Again, I have nothing against even recreational use, so I'm certainly not knocking anyone who smokes or eats it medically or for shiats and giggles, just saying that it MIGHT be better to have exact doses of specific compounds to aid specific medical conditions.

Yea, I guess if you need to be REALLY exact it might be more specific. I just know if I'm feeling like I'm gonna puke, it does the trick if I crank up the vape...lol.

This. If you don't want to smoke a bowl, then get the munchies from your munchies.The "side effects" that they are trying to get rid of are mellowness, smiling, laughter, and a sense of relaxed well-being.

Towermonkey:nekom: vpb:Yes, but I thought there was a THC pill already on the market. Besides, for some medical conditions the hazard of smoking is kind of irrelevant.

Marinol, I believe. And I agree, in the case of a terminally ill patient, smoke away. But for an otherwise healthy person suffering from glaucoma, non-terminal cancer who need the appetite boost, etc. it's a bit safer. I support both medical and responsible recreational use among adults, but I can't say that smoking any substance is "safe".

Anecdotally, Marino isn't as good at stimulating hunger and relieving pain as good ol' Sour Diesel. IIRC, it isn't prescribed for pain relief, or it wasn't when I had a work friend going through chemo. Then again, she liked to smoke up a bit before she got sick, so who knows? All I know is, marijuana shouldbe legal. There's no good, compelling rreason it shouldn't be.

I believe it's prescribed solely to increase appetite, I haven't heard of it being prescribed for pain control. I don't know how well it works for appetite stimulation, but it's used in a lot of nursing homes for that purpose.

fireclown:No, subby. This story isn't "big pharma gets richer", it is "medical marijuana advocates don't want medicine so much as they want to get high".

I've long admired your ability to miss the point entirely while sitting back with a smug look on your face like that "Study it out" grandma with her blue-blocker sunglasses.

"Big Pharma" has been fighting against marijuana for literally decades, claiming that it has zero medicinal value. But then they throw that argument out the window once they sense an opportunity to isolate and PATENT a marijuana derivative that they can sell for a government-protected profit. All this nattering about marijuana being a "gateway drug" gets trotted out by pharmaceutical companies, distilleries and RJ Reynolds, all of whom stand to lose hundreds of millions of dollars when (not "if") recreational marijuana becomes legal, and they're assisted in this endeavor by weak-minded people who feel a need to be protected from the monsters that live under their beds.

BafflerMeal:Psylence: argylez: LordJiro: Alcohol and tobacco are both, at BEST, just as dangerous as marijuana, and they're legal.

As far as I know tobacco has NO medicinal properties.

/just a drug

Tobacco can help with IBS symptoms...

It also helps topically when applied to hornet and wasp stings, etc...

I've heard that, not sure if that's just an old wive's tale or if it actually has any merit. I have also heard that nicotine can be important in the treatment of schizophrania, though naturally non-smoking alternative sources are recommended.

nekom:BafflerMeal: Psylence: argylez: LordJiro: Alcohol and tobacco are both, at BEST, just as dangerous as marijuana, and they're legal.

As far as I know tobacco has NO medicinal properties.

/just a drug

Tobacco can help with IBS symptoms...

It also helps topically when applied to hornet and wasp stings, etc...

I've heard that, not sure if that's just an old wive's tale or if it actually has any merit. I have also heard that nicotine can be important in the treatment of schizophrania, though naturally non-smoking alternative sources are recommended.

Absolutely works. Experienced it firsthand several times. Needs to be partially digested though. Big wad of chew with saliva. Then compress on sting area.

A Shambling Mound:Mr. Right: If the proponents of medical marijuana (one of which I happen to be) are serious about using it for pain management, they will welcome this study, as smoking anything presents a risk to the lungs and other respiratory organs that tablets will avoid.

However, if governments and drug companies are serious about pain relief and not just controlling marijuana, they will acknowledge that some users, suffering from nausea, for example, will find a pill unacceptable and still need to smoke it.

We'll know the true motives of both sides by how this debate shapes up as research progresses.

Suggesting we don't already know the true motive of both sides is, at this point in the debate, high comedy.

I don't understand why anyone thinks it matters to drug companies which way marijuana is legalized, pill or smoking (or both). It's not like they'll stay out of the market if it's only legal to smoke it but if it's a pill they're totally in. Either they'll be in or they won't. Sometimes you gotta realize that tinfoil hat isn't really helping.

argylez:LordJiro: Alcohol and tobacco are both, at BEST, just as dangerous as marijuana, and they're legal.

As far as I know tobacco has NO medicinal properties.

/just a drug

Nicotine can normalize EEG in the short term for patients with ADHD, schizophrenia and even alzheimers, but no one would ever prescribe tobacco for mental health patients. Also ironically compounds in FRESH tobacco have been found to have tumor inhibiting properties, it seems the process of curing tobacco is where a lot of the nasty stuff comes from not to mention all the additives.

BafflerMeal:Technically no. There are drugs on the market today that are chemicals that have never existed in nature in any form. There are a lot of hail marys that go into phase one testing.

Depending on how you want to view it, either all phase one tests are hail mary's, or none of them are. Either you think it's a hail mary because it has never been tested in humans before so we have no idea what will actually happen, or you think it's not a hail mary because there's a huge mountain of evidence about the drug in animal models that look extremely promising. Don't be silly and pick and choose based on the drug.

Ridiculous. With marijuana, there's very little research and development cost as comnpared to inventing and creating new pain relievers, so pharmaceutical companies would cut the margins down to a minimum. Right? Guys?

lennavan:BafflerMeal: Technically no. There are drugs on the market today that are chemicals that have never existed in nature in any form. There are a lot of hail marys that go into phase one testing.

Depending on how you want to view it, either all phase one tests are hail mary's, or none of them are. Either you think it's a hail mary because it has never been tested in humans before so we have no idea what will actually happen, or you think it's not a hail mary because there's a huge mountain of evidence about the drug in animal models that look extremely promising. Don't be silly and pick and choose based on the drug.

Didn't say I was. Both statements are true. There are drugs today that were wholly created in the lab that have no existence prior to the lab, and there are a lot of hail marys that go into phase one. I'm sorry if it was written as to sound like I cared either way. I was addressing the comment I replied to.

The chemical that causes appetite increases - which is what all the pro-legaized/pro-'medicinal' people claim is a benefit from smoking is easily synthesized and manufactured in pill form. Again old info.

PLUS doing it this way removes the 'intoxicants' from the pot so a user won't get high.

The pro-pot/pro-'medicinal' people have an issue with doing it this way.

nekom:Not that I disagree with the point about corporate profits, but wouldn't a pill containing the same chemical that helps certain conditions (be that THC, CBD or whathaveyou) be a safer alternative? I mean, let's not live in fantasy land here, smoking anything IS unhealthy.

What concerns me, is the impurities from the soil, weed killer chems, etc, that can be in med MJ. Totally unregulated and unsupervised. (I know Big Pharm would do that to (and has I'm sure) if they could get away with it), so I'm not taking sides here (dons flame retardant gear)

Would love to see Big Pharma kicked on their collective asses, but would also love to see tome true scientific research, double blind studies over large population groups, into the risks and benefits of this in all forms. (pill and 'wild')

Alphakronik:nekom: Not that I disagree with the point about corporate profits, but wouldn't a pill containing the same chemical that helps certain conditions (be that THC, CBD or whathaveyou) be a safer alternative? I mean, let's not live in fantasy land here, smoking anything IS unhealthy.

Alphakronik:nekom: Not that I disagree with the point about corporate profits, but wouldn't a pill containing the same chemical that helps certain conditions (be that THC, CBD or whathaveyou) be a safer alternative? I mean, let's not live in fantasy land here, smoking anything IS unhealthy.

Citation needed (and be specific to cannabis).

You know as well as I do that there as many studies out there saying that it's perfectly safe as there are saying it's worse than tobacco. I don't believe either to be the case. I don't think it's any more harmful than tobacco at least, I'll give you that. And those who smoke it only once in awhile are mitigating the risk a lot. There are also alternatives to smoking it. I'm just not ready to call smoking ANY substance "perfectly safe". The same byproducts of combustion occur in marijuana as well as tobacco, though tobacco may be significantly worse due to so many additives.

I will say that I rate marijuana, in a big picture sense, as WAAAAAAAAAAAAY below tobacco in terms of harm to the individual as well as harm to society. Same goes for alcohol. It's just not as safe as breathing pure mountain air.

They can try to sell it all day, but legal weed will obliterate their business.

In any case, I've read about the THC pill, it has NOT been a big hit for a reason. It's much harder to control than smoking, the effects are much less pleasant and more debilitating, and it's not cheap either. There are tremendous advantages to whole-herb formulas, and in the near future, if things go well, it will be dirt cheap (even with high taxes - I can buy a pound of "pipe" tobacco for less than $20, and you can bet most of that is taxes).

The ONLY reason to use Marinol is because you can get it in states where pot is illegal. It's worthless.

nekom:Not that I disagree with the point about corporate profits, but wouldn't a pill containing the same chemical that helps certain conditions (be that THC, CBD or whathaveyou) be a safer alternative? I mean, let's not live in fantasy land here, smoking anything IS unhealthy.

True, but inhaling a drug is the 2nd fastest most effective way to get it into your bloodstream. A needle is the fast, powder undeer the tongue is 3rd.